In patients with normal systolic function, conventional right ventricular apical pacing resulted in adverse left ventricular remodeling and in a reduction in the left ventricular ejection fraction; these effects were prevented by biventricular pacing. (Centre for Clinical Trials number, CUHK_CCT00037.)
AimsPermanent cardiac pacing is the only effective treatment for symptomatic bradycardia, but complications associated with conventional transvenous pacing systems are commonly related to the pacing lead and pocket. We describe the early performance of a novel self-contained miniaturized pacemaker.Methods and resultsPatients having Class I or II indication for VVI pacing underwent implantation of a Micra transcatheter pacing system, from the femoral vein and fixated in the right ventricle using four protractible nitinol tines. Prespecified objectives were >85% freedom from unanticipated serious adverse device events (safety) and <2 V 3-month mean pacing capture threshold at 0.24 ms pulse width (efficacy). Patients were implanted (n = 140) from 23 centres in 11 countries (61% male, age 77.0 ± 10.2 years) for atrioventricular block (66%) or sinus node dysfunction (29%) indications. During mean follow-up of 1.9 ± 1.8 months, the safety endpoint was met with no unanticipated serious adverse device events. Thirty adverse events related to the system or procedure occurred, mostly due to transient dysrhythmias or femoral access complications. One pericardial effusion without tamponade occurred after 18 device deployments. In 60 patients followed to 3 months, mean pacing threshold was 0.51 ± 0.22 V, and no threshold was ≥2 V, meeting the efficacy endpoint (P < 0.001). Average R-wave was 16.1 ± 5.2 mV and impedance was 650.7 ± 130 ohms.ConclusionEarly assessment shows the transcatheter pacemaker can safely and effectively be applied. Long-term safety and benefit of the pacemaker will further be evaluated in the trial.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02004873.
Background and Purpose— Intracranial hemorrhage rates are higher in Asians than non-Asians, especially in patients receiving warfarin. This randomized evaluation of long-term anticoagulation therapy subgroup analysis assessed dabigatran etexilate (DE) and warfarin effects on stroke and bleeding rates in patients from Asian and non-Asian countries. Methods— There were 2782 patients (15%) from 10 Asian countries and 15 331 patients from 34 non-Asian countries. A Cox regression model, with terms for treatment, region, and their interaction was used. Results— Rates of stroke or systemic embolism in Asians were 3.06% per year on warfarin, 2.50% per year on DE 110 mg BID (DE 110), and 1.39% per year on DE 150 mg BID (DE 150); in non-Asians, the rates were 1.48%, 1.37%, and 1.06% per year with no significant treatment-by-region interactions. Hemorrhagic stroke on warfarin occurred more often in Asians than non-Asians (hazard ratio [HR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3–4.7; P =0.007), with significant reductions for DE compared with warfarin in both Asian (DE 110 versus warfarin HR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03–0.66 and DE 150 versus warfarin HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06–0.77) and non-Asian (DE 110 versus warfarin HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19–0.72 and DE 150 versus warfarin HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.13–0.58) patients. Major bleeding rates in Asians were significantly lower on DE (both doses) than warfarin (warfarin 3.82% per year, DE 110 2.22% per year, and DE 150 2.17% per year). Conclusions— Hemorrhagic stroke rates were higher on warfarin in Asians versus non-Asians, despite similar blood pressure, younger age, and lower international normalized ratio values. Hemorrhagic strokes were significantly reduced by DE in both Asians and non-Asians. DE benefits were consistent across Asian and non-Asian subgroups. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00262600.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.